STATE OF TELANGANA Vs. AKBAR ALI KHAN HYDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Petition, under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is filed by the petitioner-State of Telangana, requesting to cancel the regular bail granted to the respondent/A.1, vide order, dated 21.01.2019, passed in Crl.M.P.No.67 of 2019 in Crime No.57 of 2018 of Dabeerpura Police Station, Hyderabad District, by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.

(2.) Heard the submissions of Sri C.Pratap Reddy, learned Public Prosecutor for the state of Telangana representing the petitioner-State, Sri Mohd. Muzafferullah Khan, learned counsel for the respondent/A.1 and perused the record.

(3.) The learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Telangana would submit that the deceased Smt.Zeba Naaz was given in marriage to the respondent/A.1 in the year 2010. They lived happily for some time. Zeba Naaz begot three children through the respondent/A.1. Thereafter, the respondent/A.1 started suspecting the fidelity of Zeba Naaz. The respondent/A.1 left to Dubai and was staying there. The respondent/A.1 used to visit India once in two or three months. Whenever the respondent/A.1 came to India, he used to meet his wife and children at the parental house of Zeba Naaz situated at King Koti, Hyderabad, thereafter take his wife to his house, used to spend time with her till night and used to drop her at her parents house. On 19.05.2018, at about 03:00 PM, the respondent/A.1 brought his wife Zeba Naaz (the deceased) to his house on his Maestro vehicle. After reaching home, A.2 (mother of A.1) went into the drawing room and started talking with Zeba Naaz and advised her to change her attitude and stay with the respondent/A.1. While A.2 was speaking with Zeba Naaz, the respondent/A.1 took a hammer and hit the deceased on her head from back side, at the instigation of A.2 saying "maardalo saali ku". On that, Zeba Naaz collapsed on the floor, became unconscious and died. Later, the respondent/A.1 called L.W.8- Md.Imranuddin, who is his friend and auto driver, and informed that he is going to Dubai and requested him to drop him. Meanwhile, the respondent/A.1 packed the dead body of Zeba Naaz completely like a parcel with the help of A.2. After packing the dead body, the respondent/A.1, along with L.W.8, went on the Maestro vehicle to check the movements of the public and the place to dump the dead body. While A.2 was watching by standing near the gate, the respondent/A.1 pulled the bag containing the dead body of Zeba Naaz and kept it in the auto. When L.W.8 asked the respondent/A.1, what is there in the parcel, the respondent/A.1 replied that the parcel was containing Pasara (old clothes) lying in the house, since long time. When A.2 was speaking with L.W.8, the respondent/A.1 kept the parcel in the auto, started his motorcycle and instructed L.W.8 to follow him. After dumping the dead body of Zeba Naaz, L.W.8 saw some stains on the seat and footrest place of the auto and asked A.2 to bring a bucket of water to clean the auto. Then the respondent/A.1 took one waste cloth and cleaned the auto, thrown the said waste cloth in the room, took his luggage bag and left to the airport. The learned Public Prosecutor would further submit that L.W.8 is the material witness in this case. The respondent/A.1 has got criminal record and he is also an accused in eight other criminal cases, viz., (1) Crime No.40/2011 under Section 498A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, of Dabeerpura Police Station, Hyderabad; (2) Crime No.41/2011 under Section 353 of IPC of Dabeerpura Police Station; (3) Crime No.91/2014 under Section 324, 506 of IPC of Dabeerpura Police Station, Hyderabad; (4) Crime No.24/2012 under Section 425, 509, 506-II, 507 of IPC of Narayanaguda Police Station, Hyderabad; (5) Crime No.141/2012 under Section 452, 427, 323, 506 of IPC of Narayanaguda Police Station, Hyderabad; (6) Crime No.297/2011 under Section 324 of IPC of Kacheguda Police Station, Hyderabad; (7) Crime No.411 of 2014 under Section 498A of IPC of WPS, CCS, DD, Hyderabad; and (8) Crime No.714/2015 under Section 498A of IPC of WPS, CCS, DD, Hyderabad. He successfully won over the witnesses in all the eight criminal cases, which resulted in his acquittal. Furthermore, there is no safety to the children of the deceased Zeba Naaz, who are presently in the custody of the de-facto complainant (mother of the deceased). With great difficulty, after issuance of Lookout Notices, the respondent/A.1 was apprehended. In case he is permitted to remain on bail, he will flee from justice. It is also contended that the respondent/A.1 murdered his wife brutally, packed the dead body like a parcel and thrown the same beside a railway track. It is also contended that with the help of Dubai Police, the respondent/A.1 was apprehended at the Shamshabad Airport and thereafter, remanded to judicial custody. The de-facto complainant/mother of the deceased Zeba Naaz approached the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, and lodged the subject report, wherein, she stated that if the respondent/A.1 is released on bail, it would be dangerous to her and her family members and also the children of Zeba Naaz. The subject case is ready for committal. The respondent/A.1 is a notorious criminal and though the police opposed for grant of bail to the respondent/A.1 contending that there is life threat to the de-facto complainant and her family members and the children of Zeba Naaz and that if the respondent/A.1 is released on bail, there is every possibility that he would indulge in threatening and winning over the witnesses, particularly L.W.8 and others, the Court below erroneously granted bail to the respondent/A.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., and ultimately prayed to cancel the bail granted to the respondent/A.1. In support of his contentions, the learned Public Prosecutor had relied on two decisions of the Apex Court in Anil Kumar Yadav Vs. State (NCT) of Delhi, 2017 AIR(SC) 5398 and State of Orissa Vs. Mahimananda Mishra, 2019 1 SCC(Cri) 325.